Deceivin' Stephen jumps left - after prorogue

[westsidebud]

now you have made some good points nabs about iggy , and i do believe most of it , infact i dnt think it would be a stretch for iggy to be a conservative , considering how he has conducted his life so far.

now my pick for a lib leader would be danny williams from newfoundland .to me he comes across as wanting to help who he was elected by , and i think when signing or making trade and what ever else deals, he would be willing to stand up for canada.

i try and look at the person , not the party , and i simply dont trust harper.i dnt see afganistan as our fight, and i think we should have been out of there by now, and trust me , im well aware , who, dragged us there in the first place.


and now that the americans are eyeing up iran, canada could be at war for next 25 years if not longer, and i dnt believe harper would even question commiting our troops , but we dont realy know what irans up to , i dont trust the american goverment anymore ,for their reasons for war.



now on the consevative side , a woman might be whats needed there as a leader , because i think they moved to much like a republican type of ideology , and before mulroony, i think to be a canadian conservative ment to be more smarter when passing laws for the people of canada

[NAB]

now you have made some good points nabs about iggy , and i do believe most of it , infact i dnt think it would be a stretch for iggy to be a conservative , considering how he has conducted his life so far.

now my pick for a lib leader would be danny williams from newfoundland .to me he comes across as wanting to help who he was elected by , and i think when signing or making trade and what ever else deals, he would be willing to stand up for canada.

i try and look at the person , not the party , and i simply dont trust harper.i dnt see afganistan as our fight, and i think we should have been out of there by now, and trust me , im well aware , who, dragged us there in the first place.


and now that the americans are eyeing up iran, canada could be at war for next 25 years if not longer, and i dnt believe harper would even question commiting our troops , but we dont realy know what irans up to , i dont trust the american goverment anymore ,for their reasons for war.



now on the consevative side , a woman might be whats needed there as a leader , because i think they moved to much like a republican type of ideology , and before mulroony, i think to be a canadian conservative ment to be more smarter when passing laws for the people of canada

Good thoughtful post westside...

I agree that Iggy is not well placed as a Liberal leader, based on the "powers" he faces within the ranks that seem dedicated to pulling the party too far to the left. His weakness IMO is that I think he struggles with his "internal left versus right", based on his intellectual strengths conflicting with his out of country backgrounds, primarily Britain and the US. Harper on the other hand is a well grounded lifelong Canadian, so better understands how the country works. Not that he has so far shown himself to be that great in selling his vision and showing that understanding, but like anything else it's a learning curve, and he has at least shown he is capable of growing into the job in spite of early mistakes. In many ways he is still a puppy, but then most of our current crop of leaders are, regardless of their age.

I also agree that Danny Williams might have made a good federal leader, but for the Conservatives not for the Liberals for reasons similar to what is destroying Iggy. Danny however is past history with most Canadians I think for federal consideration, plus with his recent health issues I suspect he will be winding down soon and Newfoundland/Labrador looking for a new Premier. One of his greatest mistakes IMO is that he has not shown himself to be broadly a "Canadian" in vision or actions. He should have taken more out of Joey Smallwoods book.

Yes, Harper could possibly have had us out of Afghanistan by now, but parliament chose to support him in extending our mission. Interesting now how we see the Dutch coalition government has collapsed because the governing coalition parties cannot agree on whether to stay in Afghanistan or pull out. It's a pretty touchy issue all round and, barring our parliament agreeing to extend again we will be out of there next year. Iggy and his Libs would have to want to keep us there for otherwise to happen as Harpers government could not do that unilaterally. For that reason I don't have a trust/no trust issue with Harper - as he can only govern according to law. We are after all a country governed under the rule of law, so his powers are not beyond the law. Laws which, for the most part, are Liberal Party concoctions in the first place. ;-)

Mulroney for sure was a departure from the Conservative mold in many ways, which is why I am comfortable with not painting the current Conservatives with any of the colours or history of the Mulroney Conservatives and his crowd. Totally different beasts, much the way our provincial NDP of the 1990's was an entirely different beast (and more to the right of) today's provincial NDP.

As for a woman PM, or even a female US president... I don't think the "Americas" and their voters are quite ready for that leap just yet.

PS: Once out of Afghanistan I don't think we will be rushing off to support another war any time soon, in Iran or any place else. We performed reasonably well in peacekeeping roles in the past and I think we need to get back closer to Lester Pearson and John Diefenbaker's vision of our place in the world militarily.

Thanks!

Nab

[westsidebud]

yea i can agree with all that .yes i agree we should stick to peacekeeping, we simply cant afford yet a large superpower type force, plus i flat out dont trust the americans when it comes to them saying who is doing what anymore.

i would like to see canada resist out sourceing jobs, do what we can to nudge china into having liveable labour laws and open that market up to exports.i dont think putting all our trade apples into the americans basket is good for canada, they have shown that even though they say were their closests friends , that they realy only lookin out for them selves.



i think it should be easier for ppl with ideas to get a loan and /or capital and go for it.i would support tax money for that, simply because you never know where the next big thing will come from. if for example microsoft was canadian company , any city it was in or town for that matter, it would have huge impact money wise.


i guess im trying to say , we should never just vote for a party with out looking at the actual ppl and what they believe in

[I Think]

Yeah, but why did deceivin stevin jump left.
Is the deceiver moving to the left?

Try not to drag red herrings around.

[Bagotricks]

How is closing Insite on "moral grounds" moving to the left?

[quietlywatching84]

Yeah, but why did deceivin stevin jump left.
Is the deceiver moving to the left?

I would say it's a move to the right. CHMC is a market distortion, thus pulling that back again is a move towards free-market a bit. It's tricky when you look at it that way.

How is closing Insite on "moral grounds" moving to the left?

How is insight on the left in the first place? The strongest case for legalizing drugs is the economic argument. I thought the right championed free market economics in politics? No, they only do it when it's convienent.

Harper is just using what is popular at the moment. This time what's popular just happens to be probably be the right move.

[westsidebud]

nope
if you seen the eastside before and now after,its way better now

[quietlywatching84]

I was talking about the mortgage rules when I said he was making the right move.

The insight stance of the conservatives is a popular move but probably the wrong direction. He is using a moral argument not a economic one to justify that policy, which just happen to contradict eachother.

[Urbane]

Why watch sitcoms when you can just watch our leaders perform for us. In this it's Ignatieff. He's a hoot!! All that finger pointing by Iggy about prorogation and now that Parliament is back in session he's not there!! Hilarious!! Here's an excerpt from Don Martin's National Post column:

It was the perfect start to spring break on Parliament Hill, what with tulips poking out of dirt thawed by sunshine and families frolicking around the Centennial Flame. It was all ruined by one unfortunate truth — MPs were still on the job.

The amount of work actually being done is open to speculation given just two dozen MPs were actually in the 308-seat House of Commons at 1:20 p.m. yesterday. More Liberal MPs were outside having a smoke than at their desks. The deputy speaker left the chair for a break — and nobody noticed.

But after being goaded into cancelling the traditional spring break by a Prime Minister feeling guilty over his pointless prorogation, the Liberal leader and more than a third of his caucus didn’t bother to show up.

Yes, you read that correctly. Just eight sitting days after declaring Parliament too pivotal to prorogue, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff embarked on a week-long national tour and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, seeing no worthy enemy combatants in the House, opted to stay in his office.

This would be the same Michael Ignatieff who wiggled his furious eyebrows last January while pledging total allegiance to the sacred, then-empty Commons. “As I hear them, Canadians are saying: get back to work in Ottawa, make this Parliament work, and do the job we elected you to do. We are listening.”

Now he’s listening to non-parliamentary audiences and taking a House of Commons pass during a week when opposition parties were given the floor to debate their own issues.

An aide promised a fresh series of hot Liberal questions to compensate for the missing leader, but the lineup delivered oft-replayed themes raised by predictable personalities quoting from memorized talking points.

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blog ... z0iJMjzVuN